Dissociating Response Prepotency and Response Conflict within Tasks of Action Inhibition among Individuals Scoring High on the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theories embedded within evolutionary neurobiology offer useful frameworks within which to understand cognitive impairment in schizophrenia (SCZ). The current research invokes the Dual Trends Theory (DTT), an evolutionary model that posits that neural architecture develops along two separate pathways: the dorsal ‘archicortical’ trend and the ventral ‘paleocortical’ trend. Although various lines of research converge to suggest that SCZ is associated with dorsal trend impairment in the context of relative ventral trend sparing, one persistent inconsistency exists. Specifically, individuals with SCZ routinely show impairment on tasks of action inhibition (AI; the ability to inhibit a pre-planned movement), a function routinely shown to be mediated by the inferior frontal gyrus, a key structure of the ventral trend. Here we argue that conventional tasks of AI conflate AI per se with response conflict (CON) demands, a function shown to be mediated by the anterior cingulate cortex, a key structure of the dorsal trend. We define CON as any aspect of a task that increases the difficulty of deciphering or interpreting the meaning of task stimuli (e.g., greater perceptual similarity between imperative task stimuli). The current research administered novel AI tasks in order to independently examine increases in CON and increases in the prepotency to respond to a pre-planned movement (PREP; considered a more fundamental measure of AI). Consistent with study hypotheses, individuals with Schizoprenia-spectrum disorders (specifically schizotypy) failed to show compensatory response time (RT) slowing when confronted with increasing CON demands yet showed proportional RTs, relative to healthy control participants, as PREP demands increased. These findings were interpreted as reflecting impairment in their ability to detect and/or decipher CON. More broadly, these findings suggest that cognitive abnormalities in SCZ may represent disproportionately impaired dorsal trend circuitry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".